Quality journalism is under threat: what to oppose to the kingdom of graphomaniacs and fake-throwers

In our difficult digital age, the information space in the world has undergone enormous technological and semantic changes. If they used to say that paper will endure anything, then the bright screen of a gadget will not only tolerate it, but will also instantly multiply it, stealing time and thoroughly clogging the brains of a wide range of users. What can you do, humanity has followed this path. And we, following everyone else, are trying to join the global trend, in the search for forms of this digital business. This is the trend, and this is seen as a big danger in the future.

A modern journalist is a multi-task operator and must be technically literate. Such opinions exist in the media space. Often, some authoritative expert circles and representatives of news agencies call for this, actively introducing into life the fashionable image of a “universal journalist.” Medical workers have already undergone a similar digital trial. Sometimes such “universal doctors”, having spent a couple of minutes with the patient, immerse themselves in the computer for a long time, filling out all kinds of forms and reports, completely forgetting about the patient. Everyone has been to clinics and seen this with their own eyes. The modern “shark of the pen” is preoccupied with the algorithms of social networks, methods of content delivery, design and other advanced things. The genuine word and fresh thought began to drown in the abyss of new technologies. A modern doctor sometimes forgets to listen to the patient, and a journalist forgets to think about the content of the text. So you can easily forget how to both heal and write.

Already from the elementary grades, the insidious number separates children from the classical word. Nowadays, school journalistic circles, known since Soviet times, have been replaced by fashionable media centers. Future journalists are taught from school to “cut” content, where the focus is not on the content, but on the entertaining form of presenting information, its packaging. Short posts, “memes” (antics), photos, “videos”, in general, everything that the Internet is rich in is called content. There is no place for wall newspapers and other “old-school” formats made according to the canons of classical journalism. The audience won’t like it, they won’t repost it, they won’t like it – the main indicator of success and reader reaction. Modern journalism follows trends rather than traditions, turning information into tasteless fast food. The authentic word fights the content.

If at the beginning of the 2000s the PR services of large state-owned companies were formed from talented writing journalists, now many of them have turned into an advertising bureau, where they recruit pretty girls who have completed secretarial practice, and the same guys who have completed fashion courses for content makers or SMM specialists. to promote the company on social networks. These same girls, with a touch of disdain, call experienced writing journalists “writers,” gradually getting rid of them as if they were unnecessary files. After all, programs for generating texts have appeared, which young PR women very cleverly use to satisfy journalistic needs.

Such figures, who are distantly related to journalism, and the representatives of the blogosphere who have joined them, are gaining authority in the media space and influencing the formation of a new journalism that is moving in the wake of digital.

The illusion of an instant meeting with the reader forces them to throw a semi-finished product onto the screen. As a result of this rapidity of fire, we see superficiality, a sea of ​​fakes and disinformation. They shoot everything – both raw and premature. As a result, there is a lot of information, but nothing to read. After spending time scrolling through messages, the audience is left with an aftertaste of dissatisfaction, and sometimes even anger. A journalist gradually evolves into a blogger with elements of an IT specialist. But journalism is different! This is a profession with centuries-old traditions, where people have a completely different creative make-up and abilities.

To write serious material, you need texture, concept, idea, thought, plan, style, form, text editing, creative torment, repeated revision, polishing of details, in the end, literary abilities and basic literacy… You need to run, sweat, comprehend and respond to a number of questions, as bequeathed by the Roman teacher of eloquence Quintilian. This is serious work! Such is the everyday life of servants of quality journalism. Well, tell me, who, who knows how to show off in the digital sphere, would want to bother with all this, waste time and energy? It’s easier to swear in a short post in a “cart” and “make a video.” The information field is gradually populated by low-quality dudes, instead of new artists of words, such as Ilya Erenburg, Vasily Peskov, Anatoly Agranovsky, Yaroslav Golovanov and other classics of domestic journalism.

The inner world of the individual and public opinion are the barriers that our competitors and simply enemies are trying to overcome, striking primarily at the state through media channels. After all, many have noticed that any patriotic remark on the Internet often receives a cloud of counterarguments, clearly written not at the call of the heart, but by order. And the task of professional journalists is to protect not only the external technological circuit from information attacks, but also to shape the reader’s inner world, fill it and strengthen the immune system, so that fakes, clever stuffing from powerful digital transmitters fly off from the consciousness, like wooden arrows from tank armor. A deep-thinking reader with an analytical and somewhat even critical view of various processes is not afraid of either unfriendly YouTube or overseas TikToks.

Preserving the true truthful word in the era of digitalization is a task no less serious than inventing your own domestic Internet. After all, with a Western click, all digital grace can instantly disappear. Everyone’s smartphone has broken down at some point and they had to go to the good old notebook. Of course, we also need specialists who feel at home in the digital web like a fish in water, who can not only Google correctly, but also know the algorithms of social networks, their strengths and weaknesses, and the preferences of a mass online audience. But this should not interfere with the preservation of the traditional press and the responsibility to raise worthy feathers. Digital should become an auxiliary element, not the vanguard of journalism.

Few newspapers and publications are now fighting for objectivity, reliability, and the classical word in our space, sometimes even doing it at a loss. And the trend is that in Russia there are fewer and fewer of them, circulations are shrinking, and the paper press is turning into a museum artifact. Today finance controls thought, spirituality, and media. If the newspaper is unprofitable, then cut down and go bankrupt. Close down – get out of the market! Editors are forced to mind their own business, look for sponsors and advertising, sometimes forgetting about the creative process and creativity as such. Profitability is important, but money should not come first here, especially in the context of an information war. After all, the technical component of information wars is progressing, not the humanitarian one. You can, of course, selectively direct funds to counter-propaganda, which is what is being done now, but this completely leaves out the all-encompassing educational essence of the Word in a wider scope and range. This field is entirely digital, and the “seed material” is of a very low standard.

Quality journalism is a labor-intensive, costly process. This product is expensive. In developed, prosperous countries, from time immemorial, no expense has been spared on subsidies to agriculture. It is more expensive to finance a food production factory on a residual basis. The spiritual food of citizens for any state or society is no less important than bread. The imbalance of death is similar to the replacement of a quality product with poisonous substitutes.

In the reckless pursuit of digital, in the integration into virtual space, there must be our own alternative. Why not direct the efforts of leading minds, science, and government in the opposite direction – think about how to evenly distribute the balance between new and traditional media? After all, the emerging bias towards numbers is not a natural phenomenon sent from behind the clouds by higher authorities, it is a completely man-made, controlled process. We have the power to put everything in its place, to return new amateur journalism – all this kingdom of graphomaniacs and fake-throwers – to its rightful peripheral place. It is no coincidence that today more and more people are returning to the real Word, as they are drawn to smart thoughts, deep analytics and real journalism. After all, the Word is the only building material for information, and it must be of the highest quality.